Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

408 part two
opportunity to contemplate the Divine Wisdom directly in its activity. While
reinterpreting the spiritual exegetical method, the early Christian authors began
to attribute to the Bible a merely dogmatic meaning. The habit of ascribing
explicit or concealed dogmatic views to Philo probably should be connected with
this very metamorphosis. It seems that the gradually fading tradition of spiritual
exegesis resulted in a loss of interest toward Philo’s heritage as well. However,
in the same epoch some works by Philo were translated into Armenian, and
the Armenian scholiography of subsequent centuries diligently preserved the
early Christian and possibly pre-Christian notions concerning Philo’s exegesis
as well.
Afterword (pp. 111–115). In order to form at least a rough idea of the source
from which the described notions might have been borrowed, one should note
the considerable number of famous catechists who demonstrate knowledge
of Philo’s works, especially of those included in the Armenian corpus. If the
adoption of the Philonic heritage by Armenian scholars has happened due to
the institution of catechization, the nearest point of transmission might be the
Jerusalem Church, with which the Armenian Church always had very active
relations. As the comparison of one of Cyril of Jerusalem’s catechetical homilies
with the respective passage of Eusebius’ Preparatio Evangelica suggests, the
collection might have been formed as a manual for the purpose of training
future catechists, the spiritual preceptors of the church, or have been transmitted
through some other, especially monastic, modifications of the catechetic rite.
Notes (pp. 116–152). Literature (pp. 153–170). Index of names (pp. 171–175).
Appendix 1: Skizbn ew patča˙r Ãnt‘erc‘uacin, i Yakobay asac‘eal [The beginning
and ‘introductory summary’ of the (scriptural) readings, delivered by Yakob]
(pp. 176–187). Publication of the text of the introductory summary by vardapet
Yakob (probably the future katholikos Yakob Klayec‘ I, † 1286) dedicated to the
Armenian Lectionary. The summary presents, mostly in a legendary way, the
history of the Lectionary and discusses some controversial points concerning
the calculation of some dates of the ecclesiastical year. From the Philonist
point of view the most noteworthy aspect is the narration about the Christian
community of Jerusalem, which was led by Jacob the Brother of the Lord, who,
in the scholiast’s view, compiled the skeleton of the Jerusalem Lectionary. Before
the siege of Jerusalem the community had migrated to Egypt (especially to the
Thebaid), where Philo became acquainted with them and gave the evidence
about them in his treatise Contempl.
Appendix 2: Eraneloy tea˙rn Grigori Niwsacwoj episkoposi eghbawr Barsghi
T‘ult‘ yaghags Ergoj Ergoc‘ [Beati episcopi Grigorii Nysseni Basilii fratris Epistula
de Cantico Canticorum (Praefatio ad Olympiadem)] (pp. 188–210). Publication
of the Armenian translation of Gregory of Nyssa’s Preface to his Commentary on
the Song of Songs, with Greek parallels to the passages, which may be interpreted
as containing ideological shifts that aim to present Gregory’s exegetical method
not as Alexandrian, but as moderate Antiochean. The text is important as
a probable source of the terminology used by Armenian scholiasts in their
description of Philo’s exegesis.
Summary in Armenian (pp. 211–225). Summary in English (pp. 226–243).
(DTR; based on the author’s summary)